Duh, right? I don’t mean for the reason you think:
Then there’s the question of how HB 2 protester Jaime Leigh Tilley got chains into the Senate gallery and secured herself to the railing? How, Walker asked, could she have gotten the chains through the Capitol security? Simple, said Dewhurst. Either she had stashed them in the chamber in the days before the debate, or she had someone with a concealed handgun license carry the chains in for her. Dewhurst said, “If you have a concealed handgun license, you don’t need to go through the X-ray.”
So if you have a concealed handgun license, then you are presumed to be a good guy.
And you don’t have to go through security screening.
Because you have a gun.
And are therefore not dangerous.
What the TITS.
For serious, I HOPE this is how people are getting contraband into the capitol building, if only because it points out how absolutely shit-ass stupid this rule is. I’m sorry, if you have a concealed handgun license, you could still be carrying any number of dangerous and/or illegal things, so how does a license grant you the presumption of good will?
Leaving aside the entire gun debate, why should you be exempted from security screening? Why shouldn’t you have to put your gun, along with your watch and commemorative super bowl pen or whatever, into a dish and walk through the thing? If you’re flashing your concealed carry permit to get out of the screening, it’s not like the gun is a secret anymore. Maybe you don’t want security to know what KIND of gun you have? I keep trying to think of ways this makes sense and I’m coming up blank, guys. Help me out here.
Seems to me all this does is create a class of protected contraband mules, who can get anything in at any time. I bet that makes everybody who works in the building feel nice and secure.
A.